Is little Acorns genuine or a blag!?

Don't chase your losses, it doesn't work. You will eventually bust your bank.
Post Reply
User avatar
Kai
Posts: 6092
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 12:21 pm

The Silk Run wrote:
Thu Aug 25, 2022 12:51 pm
It was an interesting topic, and debate. But, as often happens the snowflakes have to have their say ....
Bit late to the party but I wouldn't take it personal Minnie, it's really not worth risking your niche in every martingale thread that pops up just to try and prove a point. Not only would challenging opinions that people have spent decades fortifying be a vain attempt in the first place, but on the off chance that you emphatically somehow do manage to prove it, that would only negatively impact said niche. So I just see it as a lose/lose really.

If you've found a niche somewhere (among other things) and other people can't or don't want to understand it for whatever subjective reason, then more power to you, surely this should be a source of personal satisfaction and not frustration.

Regarding the recurring gold star PC badge of honor etc suggestions, you can't really fault human desire for status as we are all competitive in nature, although people sort of already attach all sorts of bronze, silver, gold, platinum etc stars to others, even if it's not the most accurate system, but would be hard to see the forum structure changing at this point. If it did change, for the sake of the argument, it still wouldn't really be an accurate representation of trading ability since perception can be altered or abused and there would still be a similar level of ambiguity around. Newer posters not knowing which generic and generalized advice to follow is part and parcel of trading, or should be at least.
User avatar
The Silk Run
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:53 am
Location: United Kingdom

Nice pen Kai, I can relate to it.
I'm genuinely incommunicado at the moment so I have been unable to reply to some posts. But, perhaps that's a good thing ....
User avatar
Crazyskier
Posts: 1157
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 6:36 pm

ShaunWhite wrote:
Fri Aug 26, 2022 1:33 pm
Crazyskier wrote:
Fri Aug 26, 2022 10:51 am
. All of this talk of being ''doomed to failure'' when increasing stakes after loss are not always accurate, given the right preset boundaries and discipline. It's certainly not for the faint-hearted, but there seem to be a lot of shutting down of debate on the matter - and that's never a good thing in my book.
It's not just the risk of going bust that makes Martingale systems foolhardy, it's increasing stakes for no other purpose than recovering losses. Have you made a comparison between your profit on turnover and what it would have been to level stakes?
[/quote]
It's not just the risk of bankrupcy, imo it's the way it limits your gains.

In the interest of debate, What's your starting stake? What do you stand to gain from each cycle? And as Derek has said, what's the actual difference between your staking plan and level staking?

Are you able to sell the concept with some facts rather than expecting people to simply believe it?
[/quote]

I will say this: The strategy has proven modestly profitable over time to even stakes, on full auto. Though to get it to that state, the selection criteria mean that only a small fraction of races will ever qualify (today's 8/134 so far for example). I have found that when I'm available at my desk and able to manually increase the stake size after a loss, (to a given point) the gains are much faster and mean the target profit can be applied EVERY race on a stop-at-win basis, rather than expecting profits on any given weekly total. That worst-case scenario stop loss being hit means that the week's gains would typically be wiped out, however this happens sufficiently infrequently (2 times in any given 30 day period, thus far) to justify it's use -so gains are generally greater overall for the same number of races with my loss-recovery method than without it.

I hope this makes sense. To the point about 'selling' or 'being believed', I have long-since stopped enjoying any perceived kudos or credit from random strangers online, - especially if gained by by telling lies! I find the notion a little absurd and any one looking at my posting history will see larger losses than gains posted overall. I'm not selling anything other than let's debate loss recovery just as we do other related topics, and be less eager to shut it down as there is clearly NOT a general consensus on strictly managed loss recovery and it's ability (or at the very least, potential) to be incorporated as a long term strategy. I fully condone the health warnings about double-until-win Martingale-style systems, but supported Minnie Lai's post as it chimed with my experience also.

CS
Atho55
Posts: 637
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 1:37 pm
Location: Home of Triumph Motorcycles

If anyone is interested here is an update to the Little Acorns for GB and IRE from 15th Aug to 30th Sep. They have slightly different criteria hence not being grouped. The criteria is still the same from the last discussion. GB had a good day yesterday but was marginally ahead but now has a small buffer against a few bad days. The strike rate of Ire perhaps lets it down from being further forward.

LA GB.jpg


LA IRE.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
DickieTheQuiche
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:15 pm

Brovashift wrote:
Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:06 pm
Hi all,

I've been testing out the Little Acorn strategy this week with £1 stakes using the Fibinacci staking plan, and either I am doing it wrong or it just doesn't stack up. It was shared on the forum so thought it might have some legs, however small they may be, and thought it might be something to work on in the background of my manual trading. Reading the website it does read very much like a 90's internet scam! lol

Anyone who doesn't know; you basically lay odds-on favs where the 2nd fav is <=6.0 and 3rd fav <=10.0, and the only criteria to check is that the 1st fav is not a BF. Reading up on how often BF win the next race I read it was around 19% of the time, thats my first red flag!

My first 2 lay won, great... but I've just had 5 concecutive losses. The author says the bigest lost they ever had was 9 losses in a row. I am in my first week and already had 5 lol. I found this pdf of the strategy online, I wonder if its a blag of the proper strategy :?:

Anyway, using the fibinacci staking doesn't add up, and looks very much like a martingale to me....

Fibinacci: 1 - 1- 2 - 3 - 5 - 8.....

My sequence: lost £0.92, lost another £0.52, lost £2, lost £2.34, and just lost £3.30... the next in the fib staking plan is 8x my stake (£8). But total loss this far is £9.08. Unless I include the first 2 winning lays (£2), then assuming the next £8 lay wins then Im at £11!?

It does say this is not a betting strategy but an "investment" strategy!

Please tell me this is not a thing?

[Edit: That £2 loss in the sequence is wrong, it was actually £1.28 @1.64. So the total loss is £8.36, 36p out, and thats because I took @1.92 odds on the first loss of -92p. The next number in the fib sequence (8) doesn't look too bad now]
Hi Guys, Be gentle PLEASE, but's what's a "BF"? I scoured the internet for the answer but couldn't find anything!

:?
User avatar
Dallas
Posts: 22671
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 10:57 pm
Location: Working From Home

DickieTheQuiche wrote:
Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:18 pm
Brovashift wrote:
Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:06 pm
Hi all,

I've been testing out the Little Acorn strategy this week with £1 stakes using the Fibinacci staking plan, and either I am doing it wrong or it just doesn't stack up. It was shared on the forum so thought it might have some legs, however small they may be, and thought it might be something to work on in the background of my manual trading. Reading the website it does read very much like a 90's internet scam! lol

Anyone who doesn't know; you basically lay odds-on favs where the 2nd fav is <=6.0 and 3rd fav <=10.0, and the only criteria to check is that the 1st fav is not a BF. Reading up on how often BF win the next race I read it was around 19% of the time, thats my first red flag!

My first 2 lay won, great... but I've just had 5 concecutive losses. The author says the bigest lost they ever had was 9 losses in a row. I am in my first week and already had 5 lol. I found this pdf of the strategy online, I wonder if its a blag of the proper strategy :?:

Anyway, using the fibinacci staking doesn't add up, and looks very much like a martingale to me....

Fibinacci: 1 - 1- 2 - 3 - 5 - 8.....

My sequence: lost £0.92, lost another £0.52, lost £2, lost £2.34, and just lost £3.30... the next in the fib staking plan is 8x my stake (£8). But total loss this far is £9.08. Unless I include the first 2 winning lays (£2), then assuming the next £8 lay wins then Im at £11!?

It does say this is not a betting strategy but an "investment" strategy!

Please tell me this is not a thing?

[Edit: That £2 loss in the sequence is wrong, it was actually £1.28 @1.64. So the total loss is £8.36, 36p out, and thats because I took @1.92 odds on the first loss of -92p. The next number in the fib sequence (8) doesn't look too bad now]
Hi Guys, Be gentle PLEASE, but's what's a "BF"? I scoured the internet for the answer but couldn't find anything!

:?
On here it's usually short for Betfair
It can also me Boyfriend in sms/messaging short hand
User avatar
Kai
Posts: 6092
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 12:21 pm

DickieTheQuiche wrote:
Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:18 pm
Brovashift wrote:
Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:06 pm
...the only criteria to check is that the 1st fav is not a BF. Reading up on how often BF win the next race I read it was around 19% of the time, thats my first red flag!
Hi Guys, Be gentle PLEASE, but's what's a "BF"? I scoured the internet for the answer but couldn't find anything!

:?
What Dallas said, although in this particular context it means "Beaten Favorite"
DickieTheQuiche
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:15 pm

Kai wrote:
Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:42 pm
DickieTheQuiche wrote:
Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:18 pm
Brovashift wrote:
Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:06 pm
...the only criteria to check is that the 1st fav is not a BF. Reading up on how often BF win the next race I read it was around 19% of the time, thats my first red flag!
Hi Guys, Be gentle PLEASE, but's what's a "BF"? I scoured the internet for the answer but couldn't find anything!

:?
What Dallas said, although in this particular context it means "Beaten Favorite"
Oh! I liked Dallas' post though, was about to search relationship status' of horses!

So that's it!? Little Acorns use ONLY those parameters to determine whether a selection should be on the radar? Can't be £97 for that surely? I know it said it was simple but that's ridiculous!

Well I guess it worked well for them for a few years, seems to have died a death of late though. I guess too many people getting on it now.
User avatar
Kai
Posts: 6092
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 12:21 pm

DickieTheQuiche wrote:
Mon Oct 03, 2022 9:13 pm
Kai wrote:
Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:42 pm
DickieTheQuiche wrote:
Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:18 pm


Hi Guys, Be gentle PLEASE, but's what's a "BF"? I scoured the internet for the answer but couldn't find anything!

:?
What Dallas said, although in this particular context it means "Beaten Favorite"
Oh! I liked Dallas' post though, was about to search relationship status' of horses!

So that's it!? Little Acorns use ONLY those parameters to determine whether a selection should be on the radar? Can't be £97 for that surely? I know it said it was simple but that's ridiculous!

Well I guess it worked well for them for a few years, seems to have died a death of late though. I guess too many people getting on it now.
Don't honestly know what the system is about friend, but I suppose you have to ask yourself whether it's worth focusing on an edge that literally anyone can purchase for <100 quid.

I'm sure the system author will promptly take down his website once the system stops working ;)

But do stop scouring the internet for a BF, before you upset your GF <3
Atho55
Posts: 637
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 1:37 pm
Location: Home of Triumph Motorcycles

Dickie, when the original criteria was backtested against a lump of data it did not work so was tweaked until a positive outcome was returned.

Taking this new criteria and seeing how it actually does going forward is the next step. It has been running since 15th Aug which coincides with the last post on page 1 of the thread.


This is the criteria for GB

LA Criteria.jpg
It`s working at the moment but there is no guarantee that it will continue to do so.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Kai
Posts: 6092
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 12:21 pm

Atho55 wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 9:06 am
Dickie, when the original criteria was backtested against a lump of data it did not work so was tweaked until a positive outcome was returned.
Tbh none of these concepts and system obsessions make any real sense to me.

So it sounds like the author has put up a system for sale and is relying on crowdsourcing and backfitting to make it work? And people still want to buy this product and buy into this whole concept??

Honestly at that point might as well work on your own projects instead. On something others won't automatically be privy to.
elofan0
Posts: 316
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 4:44 pm

would it also work in play :D
User avatar
ShaunWhite
Posts: 9731
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am

Kai wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 11:30 am

Tbh none of these concepts and system obsessions make any real sense to me.

So it sounds like the author has put up a system for sale and is relying on crowdsourcing and backfitting to make it work? And people still want to buy this product and buy into this whole concept??

Honestly at that point might as well work on your own projects instead. On something others won't automatically be privy to.
Absolutely. The other sham is 'system finder' sites that don't even have rudimentary in/out of sample randomisation. It's not in their interest to.
User avatar
Kai
Posts: 6092
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 12:21 pm

Atho55 wrote:
Tue Oct 04, 2022 9:06 am
Taking this new criteria and seeing how it actually does going forward is the next step. It`s working at the moment but there is no guarantee that it will continue to do so.
Surely, if there is no "positive expectancy" the only logical next step is to just bin it.

There's people like Dickie here scouring the internet for reviews on this system and finding this thread because the website results weren't updates since June and they're wondering if the system still "works".

Well one obvious answer here is that the system does still works as intended, for the author, because YOU (the buyers) are the flipping system.

EDIT: You could maybe argue that you're purchasing the right to resume someone else's work and you may have a point to some extent, but that's also yet another conceptual dead end, if you have an aversion to (hard) work then how do you expect to reap any rewards in the first place.
Atho55
Posts: 637
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 1:37 pm
Location: Home of Triumph Motorcycles

Kai, I have absolutely no idea what you are going on about. I looked at it more out of curiosity than anything else but once proved it did not work against the original criteria it was a simple job to "tweak it" to give some odds that LOOK LIKE they MIGHT work. Hence it`s set up on the new criteria and I reported against it. That`s it.

If it saves just 1 person wasting money buying a system that does not work then it`s job done. Read the thread from the start to see how it evolved.

Why not be generous and offer one of your own ideas to pore over instead of being negative about the work of others.....
Post Reply

Return to “Loss recovery systems and methods”